Are the limits to what changes an acharya may implement?

[Kulapavana]

Are the limits to what changes in tradition and sadhana a sampradaya acharya or guru may implement without creating an apa-sampradaya?

[Guest guest]

From science of self realization, Srila Prabhupada makes this point:

 

"The Vedas enjoin us to seek out a guru; actually, they say to seek out the guru, not just a guru. The guru is one because he comes in disciplic succession. What Vyasadeva and Krsna taught five thousand years ago is also being taught now. There is no difference between the two instructions. Although hundreds and thousands of acaryas have come and gone, the message is one. The real guru cannot be two, for the real guru does not speak differently from his predecessors. Some spiritual teachers say, "In my opinion you should do this," but this is not a guru. Such so-called gurus are simply rascals. The genuine guru has only one opinion, and that is the opinion expressed by Krsna, Vyasadeva, Narada, Arjuna, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, and the Gosvamis. Five thousand years ago Lord Sri Krsna spoke the Bhagavad-gita, and Vyasadeva recorded it. Srila Vyasadeva did not say, "This is my opinion." Rather, he wrote, sri-bhagavan uvaca, that is, "The Supreme Personality of Godhead says." Whatever Vyasadeva wrote was originally spoken by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Srila Vyasadeva did not give his own opinion.

 

Consequently, Srila Vyasadeva is a guru. He does not misinterpret the words of Krsna, but transmits them exactly as they were spoken. If we send a telegram, the person who delivers the telegram does not have to correct it, edit it, or add to it. He simply presents it. That is the guru's business. The guru may be this person or that, but the message is the same; therefore it is said that guru is one."

 

mahaksadasa: From this we can surmise that any changes are not major, notr do they go away from the actual science of ZERO CHANGES. The time and place changes that we sometimes see do not interfere with the actual teaching, and definitely do not contradict. Srila Prabhupada may create a stir by initiating females, and giving them brahmana threads, but there is no injunction against this practice.

 

haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

 

PS However, if one states that one does not need a guru, this is contradictory, if one says that a guru can be a criminal, this is not concurred by Vyasadeva.

[Guest guest]

 

Are the limits to what changes in tradition and sadhana a sampradaya acharya or guru may implement without creating an apa-sampradaya?

 

Yes

 

If a devotee disregards the instructions of his own Guru and does things that are against the principles of sanatan dharma then they have departed from their sampradaya.

 

One of the rules for a Guru is that he should not accept disciples merely for the purpose of attaining "success" but rather he should only accept disciples who are willing to follow the teachings of the founder of the Sampradaya, Sri Gauranga Sundara.

 

This notion of a "sampradaya acharya", is a concoction, by the way.

 

The creator of this concocted idea wrote that the list of 32 (as he calls it) is a list of great preachers who spread Krishna Consciousness widely. He reasons that the list of 32 is so composed in order to list the greatest preachers. Being a great preacher is what gets someone onto the list. Then he tries to explain why Jagannatha das Babaji and Gaurakisore das Babaji are on the list, even though they did not engage in preaching to the general public at all. His explanation is lame. He really doesn't understand why and how that list of 32 devotees was compiled by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura.

 

The Gaudiya Math didn't fail. It evolved. ISKCON hasn't failed. It is evolving. But for it to evolve into a real spiritual movement it will have to change tremendously. ISKCON, as it stands today, is hardly more than a cult that milks Indians of their money. What more can we say about it?

[Kulapavana]

 

Yes

 

If a devotee disregards the instructions of his own Guru and does things that are against the principles of sanatan dharma then they have departed from their sampradaya.

 

One of the rules for a Guru is that he should not accept disciples merely for the purpose of attaining "success" but rather he should only accept disciples who are willing to follow the teachings of the founder of the Sampradaya, Sri Gauranga Sundara.

 

This notion of a "sampradaya acharya", is a concoction, by the way.

 

The creator of this concocted idea wrote that the list of 32 (as he calls it) is a list of great preachers who spread Krishna Consciousness widely. He reasons that the list of 32 is so composed in order to list the greatest preachers. Being a great preacher is what gets someone onto the list. Then he tries to explain why Jagannatha das Babaji and Gaurakisore das Babaji are on the list, even though they did not engage in preaching to the general public at all. His explanation is lame. He really doesn't understand why and how that list of 32 devotees was compiled by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura.

 

The Gaudiya Math didn't fail. It evolved. ISKCON hasn't failed. It is evolving. But for it to evolve into a real spiritual movement it will have to change tremendously. ISKCON, as it stands today, is hardly more than a cult that milks Indians of their money. What more can we say about it?

 

can you please elaborate on the highlighted part?

[Guest guest]

I am the person who wrote that earlier comment.

 

The list of the Guru-Parampara compiled by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura is a list of devotees who were siddha-Vaishnavas and who conveyed (either through preaching or example) a particular message:

 

1. Sri Gauranga is Radha Krishna combined.

2. To understand Radha Krishna, you need to get the mercy of Nitai

(hence, people who are disrespectful of Nitai such as some members of the Advaita-vamsa etc are disqualified)

3. When you do service to Nitai's Lord, Gauranga, you will get the direct service of Radha-Krishna in Vraja (hence, people who neglect to worship Gauranga and instead think that proper sadhana is to say "Radhe, Radhe, Radhe" kirtana all day long are mere pretenders).

4. Thakura Bhaktivinode was a worshiper of Gaura-Gadadhara. What is that worship of Gaura-Gadadhara is really about? Do the 60 ISKCON gurus understand the reality of Gaura-Gadadhara. If you haven't realized Gadadhara-tattva, do you imagine you can really approach and worship Sri Radha? Do you imagine you are really connecting them to the sampradaya of Mahaprabhu, when you give the people "initiation" and tell them chant Hare Krishna? Some people preach that we should all go and do worship of Sri Radha-Krishna in Vrindaban, and do Radha-manjari-seva at Radha-kunda, but if you ask them to please explain the mood of vipralambha that Gadadhara tasted every day they will only give you some superficial statement. It is something, they will say, that they haven't really thought about very much. After all, the worship of Gaura-Gadadhar as practiced by Thakur Bhaktivinode isn't really explained in a comprehensive way in Prabhupada's books - and WE only read Prabhupada's books. But then remember, friends, that Gadadhara never went to earthly Vraja even once in his lifetime. Yet you see these Gurus saying that people should go to Vraja and offer flowers and incense to Radha-Govinda while imagining "I am a servant of Sri Radha". This type of philosophy is bogus, and it was condemned by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura. But then again, if you approach Gadadhara Prabhu and get his mercy you will get a visa to go to divine Vraja-mandala.

5. Jagannatha das Babaji was a worshiper of Sadbhuja-Mahaprahbu, and then later he came to live one hundred metres from the temple of Vishnupriya's Deity of Mahaprabhu in Nabadwip. He worshipped Gauranga day and night. Jagannatha das Babaji said it is better to worship Gauranga than Krishna, and he created a Mahamantra to worship Gauranga. Here it is "Sri Krishna Chaitanya, Prabhu Nityananda, Sri Advaita, Gadadhar Srivasadi Gaura Bhakta Vrnda" (does that sound familiar - I expect it is!!)

6. Gaura-kishore left Vraja to go to Nabadwip - he realized Nabadwip is non-different from Gokula and Goloka. And Thakur Bhaktivinode wrote the same thing, in his commentary to Brahma Samhita. Speaking of Thakur Bhaktivinode, why did he choose to go to Puri and live out the last days of his life there, and not at Radha-kunda? What special thing did he find in Puri? What attracted him to Puri?

 

In regard to this, there is a verse:

 

nilambhodhi-tate sada sva-viraha-ksepanvitam bandhavam

srimad-bhagavati katha madiraya sanjivayan bhati yah

srimad-bhagavatam sada sva-nayanashru payanaih pujayan

gosvami-prabaro gadadhara-vibhur-bhuyat mad-eka-gatih

 

On the shore of the broad blue ocean, Gadadhara Pundit used to read Srimad Bhagavatam to Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, who was suffering from the great internal pain of separation from Himself (Krishna). Gadadhara Pundit supplied the wine of Krishna-Lila to intoxicate his afflicted friend and give Him relief. As he read, tears would fall from his eyes like flower offerings onto the pages of Srimad Bhagavatam. May the pleasure of that brilliant personality, Gadadhara Pundit, the best of the Goswamis, be my only object in writing this book Sri Sri Prappana Jivanamrtam.

 

Devotees are not hollow, shallow people will understand the reason why Thakur Bhaktivinode made his samadhi in Puri. They will also feel an appreciation for Gaura-kishore. Not just Gaura-kishore das babaji, but Gaura-kishora.

[Kulapavana]

 

nilambhodhi-tate sada sva-viraha-ksepanvitam bandhavam

srimad-bhagavati katha madiraya sanjivayan bhati yah

srimad-bhagavatam sada sva-nayanashru payanaih pujayan

gosvami-prabaro gadadhara-vibhur-bhuyat mad-eka-gatih

 

On the shore of the broad blue ocean, Gadadhara Pundit used to read Srimad Bhagavatam to Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, who was suffering from the great internal pain of separation from Himself (Krishna). Gadadhara Pundit supplied the wine of Krishna-Lila to intoxicate his afflicted friend and give Him relief. As he read, tears would fall from his eyes like flower offerings onto the pages of Srimad Bhagavatam. May the pleasure of that brilliant personality, Gadadhara Pundit, the best of the Goswamis, be my only object in writing this book Sri Sri Prappana Jivanamrtam.

 

yes, I know that sweet verse that Srila Sridhara Maharaja wrote.

 

Thank you for your explanations.

[Kulapavana]

I repeat the question:

 

Are the limits to what changes in tradition and sadhana an acharya or guru may implement without creating an apa-sampradaya?

 

I am somewhat surprised that there is so little response to such an important question.

[Beggar]

 

I am the person who wrote that earlier comment.

 

The list of the Guru-Parampara compiled by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura is a list of devotees who were siddha-Vaishnavas and who conveyed (either through preaching or example) a particular message:

 

1. Sri Gauranga is Radha Krishna combined.

2. To understand Radha Krishna, you need to get the mercy of Nitai

(hence, people who are disrespectful of Nitai such as some members of the Advaita-vamsa etc are disqualified)

3. When you do service to Nitai's Lord, Gauranga, you will get the direct service of Radha-Krishna in Vraja (hence, people who neglect to worship Gauranga and instead think that proper sadhana is to say "Radhe, Radhe, Radhe" kirtana all day long are mere pretenders).

4. Thakura Bhaktivinode was a worshiper of Gaura-Gadadhara. What is that worship of Gaura-Gadadhara is really about? Do the 60 ISKCON gurus understand the reality of Gaura-Gadadhara. If you haven't realized Gadadhara-tattva, do you imagine you can really approach and worship Sri Radha? Do you imagine you are really connecting them to the sampradaya of Mahaprabhu, when you give the people "initiation" and tell them chant Hare Krishna? Some people preach that we should all go and do worship of Sri Radha-Krishna in Vrindaban, and do Radha-manjari-seva at Radha-kunda, but if you ask them to please explain the mood of vipralambha that Gadadhara tasted every day they will only give you some superficial statement. It is something, they will say, that they haven't really thought about very much. After all, the worship of Gaura-Gadadhar as practiced by Thakur Bhaktivinode isn't really explained in a comprehensive way in Prabhupada's books - and WE only read Prabhupada's books. But then remember, friends, that Gadadhara never went to earthly Vraja even once in his lifetime. Yet you see these Gurus saying that people should go to Vraja and offer flowers and incense to Radha-Govinda while imagining "I am a servant of Sri Radha". This type of philosophy is bogus, and it was condemned by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura. But then again, if you approach Gadadhara Prabhu and get his mercy you will get a visa to go to divine Vraja-mandala.

5. Jagannatha das Babaji was a worshiper of Sadbhuja-Mahaprahbu, and then later he came to live one hundred metres from the temple of Vishnupriya's Deity of Mahaprabhu in Nabadwip. He worshipped Gauranga day and night. Jagannatha das Babaji said it is better to worship Gauranga than Krishna, and he created a Mahamantra to worship Gauranga. Here it is "Sri Krishna Chaitanya, Prabhu Nityananda, Sri Advaita, Gadadhar Srivasadi Gaura Bhakta Vrnda" (does that sound familiar - I expect it is!!)

6. Gaura-kishore left Vraja to go to Nabadwip - he realized Nabadwip is non-different from Gokula and Goloka. And Thakur Bhaktivinode wrote the same thing, in his commentary to Brahma Samhita. Speaking of Thakur Bhaktivinode, why did he choose to go to Puri and live out the last days of his life there, and not at Radha-kunda? What special thing did he find in Puri? What attracted him to Puri?

 

In regard to this, there is a verse:

 

nilambhodhi-tate sada sva-viraha-ksepanvitam bandhavam

srimad-bhagavati katha madiraya sanjivayan bhati yah

srimad-bhagavatam sada sva-nayanashru payanaih pujayan

gosvami-prabaro gadadhara-vibhur-bhuyat mad-eka-gatih

 

On the shore of the broad blue ocean, Gadadhara Pundit used to read Srimad Bhagavatam to Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, who was suffering from the great internal pain of separation from Himself (Krishna). Gadadhara Pundit supplied the wine of Krishna-Lila to intoxicate his afflicted friend and give Him relief. As he read, tears would fall from his eyes like flower offerings onto the pages of Srimad Bhagavatam. May the pleasure of that brilliant personality, Gadadhara Pundit, the best of the Goswamis, be my only object in writing this book Sri Sri Prappana Jivanamrtam.

 

Devotees are not hollow, shallow people will understand the reason why Thakur Bhaktivinode made his samadhi in Puri. They will also feel an appreciation for Gaura-kishore. Not just Gaura-kishore das babaji, but Gaura-kishora.

 

All very beautiful and all true, yet their are inifinite angles of vision in Krsna Consciousness. Gadadhara Pandit is Srimati Radharani. Sometimes it is said that he is Srimati Radharani without Her bhava and kanti, which was "stolen" or at least borrowed by Mahaprabhu. Sometimes Gadadhara Pandit is seen as fully Srimati Radharani. But either way Gadadhara Pandit is Srimati Radharani. The jiva souls prospect is not the same as Srimati Radharani's attainment of Krsna prema. She is the predominated moeity and therefore has "infinite negative capacity" to attract Krsna and experience the higher levels of prema. The jiva souls are told to be infinitesimal and do not have this capacity. Their prospect has been revealed by Srila Rupa Goswami and our guru varga is called the Rupanuga guru varga. In The Nectar of Instruction by Srila Rupa Goswami, Srila Prabhupada translates the 8th verse:

 

NoI 8: The essence of all advice is that one should utilize one's full time — twenty-four hours a day — in nicely chanting and remembering the Lord's divine name, transcendental form, qualities and eternal pastimes, thereby gradually engaging one's tongue and mind. In this way one should reside in Vraja [Goloka Vṛndāvana dhāma] and serve Kṛṣṇa under the guidance of devotees. One should follow in the footsteps of the Lord's beloved devotees, who are deeply attached to His devotional service.

 

Of course Navadvipa dhama is non-different than Vrndavana dham. Vrndavana dham is the manifestation of madhurya and Navadvipa dhama is the manifestation of audarya, where Mahaprabhu is giving out the highest thing to the lowest, often through Nityananda Prabhu. We are told in Brahma Samhita that some devotees when they attain perfection engage in Krsna's pastimes and some in Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's pastimes, and some in both simultaneously. If we have the same bhava and level of realization as Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura then we may feel as Srila Sridhar Maharaja put it that those who do not engage in that mood of the worship of Gaura-Gadadhar are "shallow and hollow". And of course we find no evidence of Sri Rupa Raghunatha (meaning the six gosvamis) in the mood of the bhajana of Sri Sri Gaura Gadadahara, so even our line is variageted even on the highest levels. But "where are we", "high talks, mad talks"? And here I am just parroting Srila Sridhar Maharaja's phrasiology. And someone else is parroting that those who have no realization of Gaura Gadadhara are hollow and shallow. But how hollow and shallow is it to repeat this without substantial realization of it? Is it just an intellectual exercise in vomiting up what we've heard from Srila Sridhar Maharaja? Is it the same "imitationism" that we accuse others of?

[Guruvani]

 

I repeat the question:

 

Are the limits to what changes in tradition and sadhana an acharya or guru may implement without creating an apa-sampradaya?

 

I am somewhat surprised that there is so little response to such an important question.

 

Maybe you should ask that question to your spiritual master and then report back to all of us what he said?

Why ask the question to strangers on a forum?

You are always hounding us about the need for a living guru, so we assume you have one.

 

Why haven't you inquired from your spiritual master about this issue?

 

We have our opinions, but you won't accept that anyway.

 

What is religion?

What is the difference between religion and irreligion?

 

Do you accept any other religion in the world or just your idea of physical succesion of gurus in the Hindu culture?

 

Does all religions have to exactly conform to the idea of a physical succession of gurus?

 

Then ask yourself if there are any limits you can put on what an acharya can do without that itself becoming irreligious.

 

Clinging to rituals and tradition at the cost of millions of soul's enlightenment is itself irreligious.

 

When tradition inpedes the flow of mercy and grace, then that tradition itself become a part of irreligion.

[Kulapavana]

 

But how hollow and shallow is it to repeat this without substantial realization of it? Is it just an intellectual exercise in vomiting up what we've heard from Srila Sridhar Maharaja? Is it the same "imitationism" that we accuse others of?

 

I have a deep appreciation for the beauty of such verses but the feelings they express are not manifested in me. just like I love beautiful music, but I cant play it myself. if I repeat such verses it is like playing a recording of good music - there is no deception on my part.

[Guruvani]

Sridhar Maharaja also said "judge a man by his ideal".

 

We should see devotees for the ideal they cherish.

In time, in this lifetime or a future life, they will eventually realise their ideal.

 

If we reject every devotee who hasn't fully realized his ideal, then we will have to eliminate about 99.99 percent of all devotees.

 

Basically, we judge a devotee for the ideal he embraces.

Sooner or later they will reach their goal.

[Beggar]

"A man is known by his ideal" is another angle of vision no doubt. Higher thoughts can only be digested by those capable of thinking higher thoughts. When an acarya is using critical analysis for the sake of making a point of siddhanta he may step on some toes. There will be no fault for his intentions are pure. We may have a high ideal but we have to be careful not to imitate. Otherwise we may be misusing siddhanta as an attempt to express our angry nature and that will manifest as fault finding. Being over-critical and analytical is not bhakti but rather jnana. If that critical nature is fueled by our frustrations then it will be transformed into bad karma or still worse aparadha and still worse Vaisnava aparadha. Better safe than sorry.

[AncientMariner]

I wonder if at the end of the Kali-yuga when virtually everybody is basically like an Orc from Lord of the Rings if an acarya will appear and say something like. My dear Orc friends, I know there is nothing I can do to get you to give up illicit sex, intoxication, gambling and meat eating so I am not going to even try. So my request to all of you is please just chant Hare Krishna even if only one time in your life, thank you very much.

[Beggar]

 

I wonder if at the end of the Kali-yuga when virtually everybody is basically like an Orc from Lord of the Rings if an acarya will appear and say something like. My dear Orc friends, I know there is nothing I can do to get you to give up illicit sex, intoxication, gambling and meat eating so I am not going to even try. So my request to all of you is please just chant Hare Krishna even if only one time in your life, thank you very much.

You just did it.

[Kulapavana]

 

We have our opinions, but you won't accept that anyway.

 

 

it is not really a personal issue. I'm interested in the discussion.

 

my criteria (limits to changes in tradition) usually gravitate towards the pragmatic approach: if it actually works, why not? as in: judge by the results. or: if it is an emergency and there is no other way, it is justified.

 

however, I am truly interested to see how other devotees look at this issue and whether there are any shastric injunctions in this area.

[Guest guest]

 

we find no evidence of Sri Rupa Raghunatha (meaning the six gosvamis) in the mood of the bhajana of Sri Sri Gaura Gadadahara, so even our line is variageted even on the highest levels.

 

That ain't right, my friend.

 

Raghunatha das Goswami lived in Puri and he heard the discourses of Gadhadhara where Gadhadhara was reading Bhagavatam to Sri Gauranga while crying tears that fell on the pages of the book.

 

And Rupa Goswami also spent time in Puri. He also got the mercy of Gadadhara.

 

Narottama das Thakura wrote in his book Prathana:

<b>Gaura-prema maya tanu, Pandita Gadadhara</b>, Srinivasa Haridasa, doyara sagara

or

The embodiment of Gaura's love, Pandita Gadadhara,

Srinivasa, Haridasa, you also are the ocean of Grace personified.

 

Narottama is in the list of Guru-Parampara, and he was the intimate friend of Srinivasa Acharya who went to learn Bhagavatam from Gadadhara Pandita. But the only Bhagavatam that Gadadhara had was the one with the words washed away. Still, Srinivasa got the mercy of Gadadhara (though he didn't get diksa), and through the mercy of Gadadhar he got the full realization of the real meaning of things written in Bhagavatam.

 

If someone understands the Bhagavatam as it was explained by Gadadhara Pandita to Mahaprabhu in Puri then they will understand the true essence of Bhagavatam. We need to enter into the mood of vipralambha-bhava and feel the mood of separation felt by Gadadhara before we can really appreciate the love Sri Radha feels for Govinda.

 

Sitting in a temple in Vrindaban and listening to a neophyte give a Bhagavatam class in which he proclaims that we should meditate on Radha-Krishna in sambhoga (the mood of union), that is the wrong approach. That is not the approach of Srila Saraswati Thakura.

 

<b>

Sri Nishikanta Sanyal:

The inmates of the Gaudiya Math have renounced the world for the purpose of serving unconditionally the Acharya, the best beloved of Krishna. But as a matter of fact, discourses about Krishna Leela are seldom heard at the Gaudiya Math. There are ordinarily only discourses about the Leela of Mahaprabhu. Are the ascetics of the Gaudiya Math then unfit to listen to the narration of Krishna-Leela?

 

To serve Krishna, one should wish to serve Krishna all the time. They who wish to serve Krishna must not hanker for worldly enjoyment in any form nor wish to commit suicide by attaining mukti. It is rarely that an ascetic wishes to serve Krishna on these conditions. Therefore, those ascetics who have no wish to serve Krishna full time are engaged by the Acharya in the service of Sree Krishna-Chaitanya which is open to all. The Acharya, by his own conduct, sets the examples of the service of Sree Chaitanya that he proposes for his disciple. Sree Chaitanya Himself poses as Servant of Sree Krishna. The Acharya serves Sree Chaitanya in accordance with the method enjoined by Sree Rupa Goswami. The inmates of the Gaudiya Math are employed by the Acharya in carrying out the scheme of service enunciated by Sree Rupa by a clearly graded [step by step] process.

</b>

-- Sree Krishna Chaitanya, Volumne 2, page 462

[AncientMariner]

 

it is not really a personal issue. I'm interested in the discussion.

 

my criteria (limits to changes in tradition) usually gravitate towards the pragmatic approach: if it actually works, why not? as in: judge by the results. or: if it is an emergency and there is no other way, it is justified.

 

however, I am truly interested to see how other devotees look at this issue and whether there are any shastric injunctions in this area.

 

 

I think it is a good question that Guruvani asks in regards to what your guru thinks about this question and I would be interested to hear the answer if you don't mind sharing.

[Guest guest]

Does anyone know if there is a downloadable copy of Sree Krishna Chaitanya, available anywhere?

[Guruvani]

Some of these posts are just dripping with ambrosia.

 

I feel cheated that I don't know who the author of some of these posts are, because in some of these posts I detect something much higher and more rich than the bulk of material found on these topics.

 

We need more of this higher thing.

 

My heart feels cheated that someone of a higher level is hiding behind anonymity.

[Kulapavana]

 

I think it is a good question that Guruvani asks and I would be interested to hear what your guru says about this question if you don't mind sharing.

 

sadly enough, all my gurus are outside my inquiry. I got diksha from Harikesha and siksha from Srila Prabhupada and Sridhara Maharaja. Guruvani knows that and that is why I did not answer him.

 

I would like very much to take shelter of a physically accessible guru I could inquire from, but alas, I was not able to find someone I can truly accept without any reservations. I often inquire from senior Vaishnavas and very much value their advice but it is not the same.

[Guest guest]

"I got diksha from Harikesha"

---------

 

you got harinam intiation from him or diksha initiation from him?

[Beggar]

 

My heart feels cheated that someone of a higher level is hiding behind anonymity.

Well he sure put me in my place Mr. Vani. Say Mr. Vani, who was that masked man?

Why don't you know son? That's the Lone Goswami...

(Aha, so here is Mr. Gosh)

[Guruvani]

 

Well he sure put me in my place Mr. Vani. Say Mr. Vani, who was that masked man?

 

I have to admit that I don't know.

I don't have the time or the energy to pay that much attention to everything.

I only post on one section of this forum and that is all I have time for.

Heck, I don't even post on my own forums anymore, but since IRM went belly-up I have noticed a little increase in activity over there.

[Beggar]

 

I have to admit that I don't know.

 

Could it be the Lone Goswami?

[Kulapavana]

 

"I got diksha from Harikesha"

---------

 

you got harinam intiation from him or diksha initiation from him?

both. in 1979 and 1980.